You’ll find out at the end of this video! LOL
Gosh, I miss Reagan….
H/t beloved Wendy
Gosh, I miss Reagan….
Wow! This one is a Must See! Charlotte ties everything together; Agenda 21, regionalism, communism, federal takeover of private education and homeschooling, changing our entire way of life and system of government.
THIS MUST GO VIRAL!
How I miss this man…
Ronald Reagan says there’s an 11th Commandment for Republicans: “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.”
On Friday, Dec. 16, 2011, appearing on NBC’s Tonight Show with Jay Leno, the nominally Republican (but really Libertarian) candidate Ron Paul was asked what he thought of his opponents with whom he’s competing to be the GOP presidential nominee.
Paul described Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich as, respectively, a former Massachusetts governor and former Speaker of the House.
Then, stripping off his genial avuncular mask, Paul turned vicious.
About Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, he had three words: “She hates Muslims.” About former U.S. Senator Rich Santorum, Paul had five words: “He hates gays and Muslims.”
So Ron Paul now can read what’s in another’s heart?
By the way, Ron Paul supporters like to tout their man as being a Constitutionalist. Do they know that Paul thinks it’s “irrelevant” whether Obama is constitutionally eligible to be President?
H/t FOTM’s beloved Sage_brush.
Last night, on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” The Narcissist defiantly proclaimed “it doesn’t really matter” who the Republicans nominate against him.
The Narcissist told interviewer Steve Kroft he’s ready to take on either Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney and asked voters to contrast his vision with that offered by the GOP nominee.
The Narcissist predicted a clear choice for the voters: “The core philosophy that they’re expressing is the same. And the contrast in visions between where I want to take the country and… where they say they want to take the country is going to be stark.”
[Source: National Journal]
For the first time, I agree with The Narcissist.
If there’ll even be an election next year, it will be a clear choice for the voters. It’s either four more years for The Narcissist to complete his total destruction of America, or voters can choose to turn this country away from the road of ruinage.
I have a message for liberals and Democrats:
More than two years ago, Obama said he wants “a new legal basis” for the preventive indefinite detention of Americans. And the ever-obliging Senate has done exactly that on December 1, by passing S. 1867. Is this what you want for yourself and your children?
Watching the six GOP candidates in last Saturday’s Iowa debate (Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann), I was impressed with the humanity of them all — what decent people they are, and how much they clearly love America.
All, excepting Newt, who impressed me as articulate but arrogant and someone who can turn nasty very quickly. That worries me because, if he becomes the GOP nominee, he will lose as American voters generally pick, for President, the “nicer” guy who has a better smile. It also doesn’t help that Newt is pudgy and paunchy. What can I say? — American voters are shallow.
Citing research by UCLA Professor Albert Mehrabian indicating that non-verbal communication — including a speaker’s smile — can be even more important than what is actually said, communications consultant Jon Kraushar maintains that the history of U.S. presidential elections shows that the winners are those whose smiles convey a positive message that inspires rather than irritates voters. Think Ronald Reagan’s “aw shucks” sunny disposition….
Having said that about Newt, my conclusion about last Saturday’s Iowa debate is that, hands down, any one of the six is light years better than the narcissistic squatter in the White House.
Ahh, the oh so tolerant left. 😀
This post comes from Glenn Becks site.
There is a Political Class in America comprised of both elected politicians and unelected cultural elites, who not only don’t care what most Americans think, they hold us in contempt.
The article, “America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution,” by Angelo M. Codevilla, a professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University, makes a compelling case that the real divide in America is not so much between liberals and conservatives as between the bipartisan political-cultural ruling class (the “regime class”) vs. the American people (whom Codevilla calls the “country class,” as in America, the country). Whereas the majority of the “country class” are religious (Christians) and patriotic, the bipartisan ruling “regime class” — stripped of their lip-service rhetoric — are irreligious; arrogant and contemptuous of the American people; and do not love America or the American people. These traits are all symptomatic of a terrible narcissism. [Read excerpts of Codevilla’s 16-page article HERE.]
Now, there is more evidence of a yawning gap between this preening Ruling Class and the majority of Americans:
On illegal immigration:
public employee GOVERNMENT unions:
On Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security (and TSA crafter) Janet Napolitano:
On Muslims in America:
On the fading American Dream:
Rebellion Against the Elite:
By Peter Hannaford – American Spectator – Jan 28, 2011
If you closed your eyes during the State of the Union address (and you allowed for the difference in voices), much of it could have been the words of Ronald Reagan. Gone was Mr. Obama’s usually peevish tone, replaced by upbeat, can-do, let’s-win-the-future words and tone.
The purpose of this was to charm independent voters. Apparently it did, according to early polls. His “favorable” rating went up. Will the charm extend to policies that promote real economic growth? Unless you ignore his lifelong training, education and actions in three public offices, don’t count on it. For him, the government is the only engine of growth and the only institution to be trusted.
Despite paeans to capitalism and individual freedom, his remarks, at the core, were for more government spending. He spoke, of making “investments” in education, infrastructure and that old chestnut, “green energy jobs.”
Investments require capital. The federal government does not have any capital. Anything it spends must be paid for in one of three ways: (1) taxes; (2) borrowing (China comes to mind as a lender) or (3) printing more money (which leads to inflation). Despite his insistence, the spending he has in mind cannot be called investments, though he will doubtless continue to describe it that way. It is, in fact, an extension of his reviled “stimulus” program. (Remember the “Shovel-ready” projects that he later admitted never existed?)
He called for a five-year “freeze” on discretionary domestic spending. This category affects only 16 percent of federal spending. His grand claim is to “save” $400 billion over 10 years. “Freezing” any spending saves exactly nothing. His “savings” are as illusory as those promised under Obamacare.
The day after the speech, the Congressional Budget Office released a new report projecting that the national debt would rise to nearly $15 trillion by the September close of the current fiscal year. The president was 80 percent of the way into his speech before he mentioned, in passing, the fact that we have a serious national debt problem. Interest on that debt soaks up 40 cents of every federal dollar spent (there’s China again).
He glossed over the two 800-pound gorillas in the room, Social Security and Medicare, which are rapidly moving toward bankruptcy. He used his familiar straw-man device. He said any reform must not touch benefits for those retired or especially vulnerable — as if anyone had done that.
Ignored completely were the findings — many of them bracing — of his own Deficit Reduction Commission, as if it had never existed.
Obama may continue to add the gloss of happy talk to his stump speeches, but they will remain, like this one, speeches dedicated to selling ever bigger government solutions to problems which require less spending, debt reduction, pro-growth tax policies and smaller government.
Peter Hannaford was closely associated with the late President Ronald Reagan for a number of years.